Comment by shooper | Hacker News Reader

Comment by shooper | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>According to the article, IBM and Microsoft are notable for their portfolio size and lobbying budgets

This is what tech companies spent in Q3 2013, maybe someone else can post IBM's stats but Microsoft's spending doesn't look all that high to me.

Google 3.4M

Microsoft 2.2M

Facebook 1.7M

Apple 0.97M

Amazon 0.78M

I think the real story is how cheap the lobbying costs are.

What I completely fail to understand with all the Snowden revelations and stories like this is that Silicon Valley tech folks have enormous salaries and high disposable income.

If they would actually contribute some of that to a PAC or to the EFF, it would be way more productive than sitting in Starbucks sipping a $5 latte and posting "Not going to get the Xbox from M$. Getting a PS4 for $400 + games for $60 each instead! That's going to teach them! And Bill Gates sucks despite helping the poorest people in Africa and India!" from their latest MacBook or iPad Air on HN articles such as these(you can see those posts below).

I guess gathering HN karma feels better and is cheaper than actually trying to make a real difference on issues that people seem to write emotional posts about.

Having seen a lot of such issues and discussions from my Slashdot days, my prediction is that nothing will come out of it except a lot of hot air discussion.

That's their budget on paper. Donors don't have to disclose all their donations:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/29/dark-money-2012-ele...

... nonprofits like Crossroads GPS and trade associations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are allowed to keep their donors secret. As a result, there is a great flood of campaign spending this election cycle for which there is no official paper trail.

I don't think the proper response of rich Valley people is to ramp up their donations to PACs unless it's the Wolf-PAC which is organizing to pass a Constitutional amendment to reform campaign finance and lobbying:

http://www.wolf-pac.com/

Soft jobs for favoured ex-politicians and ex-bureaucrats won't show up as campaign or lobbying expenditure either.

Oh, and then there are the insider trading tips too.

I believe that's true for contributions from private companies who don't have to report their earnings. Maybe a finance guru can pitch in, but don't public companies like IBM and Microsoft have to declare such donations in their earnings statements?

They are at least focusing on the heart of the matter: corporate personhood. Get rid of that, and you open the door for all the other reforms. As long as amoral, immortal and extremely powerful entities like corporations get equal rights as human beings, it is unavoidable that the laws, including patent law, are forced along amoral pathways.

Software patent reform is battling a symptom, not the cause.

Yes, most people here make absurds amount of money and rage against this kind of thing but for some reason are super hesitant to actually donate to people fighting for things they believe in. If you're a developer, please consider making a monthly donation to the EFF. https://supporters.eff.org/donate

Nice idea but why they don't talk about what they really do? Five sentences in the "what we do" section isn't enough, where's detailed plan? And as I see in their latest financial report, they've got 7.86 million dollars last year but only spent 4.53. Looks like they've got enough money, but not enough opportunities for it?

Having a small savings to get you through trouble doesn't make you well off. You make it sound like you have to run yourself irresponsibly in the red to be able to qualify as struggling to get by.

I don't know too many details, but they are running multiple lawsuits against the nsa https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying.

Yes--we need to know what they do? We need to be able to look up their financials on GuideStar. We need to know how much the founders are taking home in salary. (I haven't checked GuideStar yet). The days of blindly giving over money are over--at least for me.

These very very low numbers should already tell you that they come from doubtful sources. $3M is absolute pocket change for companies like Google and Microsoft, compared to the enormous benefits you can realize with lobbying.

I really want to like Bill Gates, but whenever I see him bragging, along with Wife, about all the people he helps-- I can't think,"But we actually paid for all your Philanthropy?"

As to this bill, it's a shame. I don't think there's a politician out there who understands B.F. Skinner.

Why should I put my money where my mouth is when I can just write a few angry posts on HN. My congressperson reads HN right?

Seriously, people need to understand that unless you are reasonably famous, people care way less about what you say than what you do. That means money. Don't give it to people and companies you don't like. Give it to people and companies you do like.

Oh and for the love of god, don't argue for silly "campaign finance" laws that restrict our ability to donate to politicians. I guarantee these large companies with armies of lawyers and lobbyists will be way more adept at finding loopholes than we the average people will be. It silences us way more than them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com